You mean, like pretty much every first year regime in the history of ever?

"I suspect you're right, going Hoyer and trading Richardson in the same day is definitely playing with being overly obvious.

Gonna have to try to "just barely lose" a couple of the upcoming games. Maybe pay the holder to drop the snap on the game winning FG attempt. Have Chud call a double reverse on 4th and short. That kind of thing."

Hikohadon wrote:This alone isn't tanking. This is just the trumpet to announce "Hey, we've been tanking!"

They started tanking when Free Agency began where they refused to address a boatload of weaknesses with even temporary solutions despite having a surplus of cap space. The continued the tanking by trading out of several draft picks to stockpile draft picks next year - not like those were super-important draft picks, but they needed to get more warm bodies to fill those holes they left by not doing anything about them in FA. Then they broke Training Camp with half the team being Undrafted Free Agents and did nothing to address the fact that they were going into a season with Oneil Cousins in a STARTING role.

Not to mention the release of Phil Dawson, the ONE guy the team could count on to put points on the board, especially in close games that could mean the difference between drafting #1 or #6.

You mean, like pretty much every first year regime in the history of ever?

"I suspect you're right, going Hoyer and trading Richardson in the same day is definitely playing with being overly obvious.

Gonna have to try to "just barely lose" a couple of the upcoming games. Maybe pay the holder to drop the snap on the game winning FG attempt. Have Chud call a double reverse on 4th and short. That kind of thing."

^Silly. "Bob Lamonte owns the BORWNS"-level silly.

Of course it is. Did you think I was being serious?

If I must, I will clearly state: No, I do not really think they will "purposely" lose games, I think they will still game plan, I think they will still try to make plays, score points, and even win if the opportunity presents itself, but they set themselves up to lose this year, and their continued actions make it easier and easier for them to do so, and if I happen to call this brand of effort "tanking" rather than "sacrificing wins now for better results in the future", it is a tomAYto/tomAHto thing rather than me truly believing they're all sitting around a table in a darkened room plotting to drop ex-lax in the gatorade.

I like HooDoo's theory better. That sounds more planful and like something an organization that had its shit together would do.

So I'm hopeful.

But Hiko ain't wrong.

Let's call it 'sacrificing' the year for the long term health of the franchise and be done with it. Because they're surely sacrificing the year (either overtly or semi-covertly) and we'll know about any long term benefits starting in May '14.

So glad I agreed to give the guy who bought my season tickets on the condition he get playoff rights this season that concession.

You mean, like pretty much every first year regime in the history of ever?

"I suspect you're right, going Hoyer and trading Richardson in the same day is definitely playing with being overly obvious.

Gonna have to try to "just barely lose" a couple of the upcoming games. Maybe pay the holder to drop the snap on the game winning FG attempt. Have Chud call a double reverse on 4th and short. That kind of thing."

^Silly. "Bob Lamonte owns the BORWNS"-level silly.

Well, if that's your definition of tanking, then it doesn't exist at all and it should be stricken from the language as we move toward newspeak.

Nobody who says their team is tanking thinks that they players anhd coaches aren't trying or are being paid off to lose on purpose.

Tanking is the team GMs and presidents and whatnot not putting them in a position to win immediately for the sake of possibly winning later.

So Gabby Johnson is right... Not trying to win now and tanking are EXACTLY the same thing.

motherscratcher wrote:Well, if that's your definition of tanking, then it doesn't exist at all and it should be stricken from the language as we move toward newspeak.

I'd say that if what we're doing now is tanking, then pretty much what every 1st year regime does is tanking, so no one should be surprised by it, nor should anyone take any issue with it.

I get that what Banbardlam was selling and what Banbardlam was doing were different things, and a lot of people bought in, and a lot of people are pissed right now. I can remember being really miffed by Mangini's "I can win with Quinn" in a matter of months turning into him gutting the progress of my beloved Phil. But the one step back, two steps forward strategy is pretty much standard operating procedure in the NFLs, regardless of what's coming out of anyone's mouth. And it's just wasted energy to be bothered by that stuff.

motherscratcher wrote:Well, if that's your definition of tanking, then it doesn't exist at all and it should be stricken from the language as we move toward newspeak.

I'd say that if what we're doing now is tanking, then pretty much what every 1st year regime does is tanking, so no one should be surprised by it, nor should anyone take any issue with it.

I get that what Banbardlam was selling and what Banbardlam was doing were different things, and a lot of people bought in, and a lot of people are pissed right now. I can remember being really miffed by Mangini's "I can win with Quinn" in a matter of months turning into him gutting the progress of my beloved Phil. But the one step back, two steps forward strategy is pretty much standard operating procedure in the NFLs, regardless of what's coming out of anyone's mouth. And it's just wasted energy to be bothered by that stuff.

I'm not and I don't. It's what they have to do to get the QB. But especially after watching Weeden the first 2 weeks it's the only play that makes sense. The only thing that sucks is that they have to do it.

And Hoodoo, stop trying to make Banbardlam happen. It's not going to happen.

A fun thing to imagine, though: what if we'd made this deal with the Steelers?

After the goofy reaction to our 4th/3rd swap... With people elsewhere actually giving up or supposedly being tempted to give up on the Borwns, because they dealt our "proven talent" Trent Richardson... Damn, that would have been something.

HoodooMan wrote:A fun thing to imagine, though: what if we'd made this deal with the Steelers?

After the goofy reaction to our 4th/3rd swap... With people elsewhere actually giving up or supposedly being tempted to give up on the Borwns, because they dealt our "proven talent" Trent Richardson... Damn, that would have been something.

HoodooMan wrote:A fun thing to imagine, though: what if we'd made this deal with the Steelers?

After the goofy reaction to our 4th/3rd swap... With people elsewhere actually giving up or supposedly being tempted to give up on the Borwns, because they dealt our "proven talent" Trent Richardson... Damn, that would have been something.

The greater Cleveland area would be a blazing hellscape of brown sludge and methed-up RTA drivers if they'd traded TR to Pittsburgh.

And as much as I'm on the "this is a good trade that makes sense" bandwagon, I'm not so sure how I'd stomach it if it was with Pittsburgh, knowing that it makes me a hypocrit.

With TR in Indy, I don't care what he does. I hope he has a nice career there. I have no problem with the guy as I think he's a good running back. But watching him do that in Pittsburgh might be too much to bear.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

peeker643 wrote:I like HooDoo's theory better. That sounds more planful and like something an organization that had its shit together would do.

So I'm hopeful.

But Hiko ain't wrong.

Let's call it 'sacrificing' the year for the long term health of the franchise and be done with it. Because they're surely sacrificing the year (either overtly or semi-covertly) and we'll know about any long term benefits starting in May '14.

So glad I agreed to give the guy who bought my season tickets on the condition he get playoff rights this season that concession.

I think this can be summed up thusly (at least as far as I'm concerned):

The talent level is poor. The holes are many. The offense is inept. There is seemingly little to no effort to make it right.

Either 1) this shitstorm is on purpose and part of a master plan to make this team instantly better next year, OR

2) They're actually trying to win and this is the result of their efforts.

I think the first one is MUCH more positive. From my view, if you don't believe they're actively or passively trying to lose, then we should assume that the 2013 season will just be the first of many lost seasons under this regime.

You tank... uh... underachieve in... the rest of the games, end up with a very high pick, get your QB (you hope) with your first pick, pick up some other playmaker with the second 1st rounder (maybe a WR to go with Gordon so that Little could move to the slot, maybe an elite Guard, maybe a Corner, etc.), then you still have 5 picks in the next 3 rounds, bust your salary cap nut to bring in Ben Tate in FA... with the defense being decent and you add a couple pieces there, this team could quite easily be damn good overnight.

Assuming they make good choices in the draft, which... uh... well, I guess we see.

Hikohadon wrote:I think this can be summed up thusly (at least as far as I'm concerned):

The talent level is poor. The holes are many. The offense is inept. There is seemingly little to no effort to make it right.

Either 1) this shitstorm is on purpose and part of a master plan to make this team instantly better next year, OR

2) They're actually trying to win and this is the result of their efforts.

I think the first one is MUCH more positive. From my view, if you don't believe they're actively or passively trying to lose, then we should assume that the 2013 season will just be the first of many lost seasons under this regime.

You tank... uh... underachieve in... the rest of the games, end up with a very high pick, get your QB (you hope) with your first pick, pick up some other playmaker with the second 1st rounder (maybe a WR to go with Gordon so that Little could move to the slot, maybe an elite Guard, maybe a Corner, etc.), then you still have 5 picks in the next 3 rounds, bust your salary cap nut to bring in Ben Tate in FA... with the defense being decent and you add a couple pieces there, this team could quite easily be damn good overnight.

Assuming they make good choices in the draft, which... uh... well, I guess we see.

I hope they don't fuck up the draft. I've read a few things about how judging by last year's draft we should have no confidence. IDK, though. They drafted Mingo in teh first and he looks solid so far. And McFadden in the thrid and he's...well...OK, he kind of sucks. The rest are 6th an 7th rounders who are almost expected to suck, or at least take some time to develop.

I just don't think there's enough info yet to decide that this regime fucked up the 2012 draft. And the trades they made absolutely make sense in retrospect, if not at the time of the draft.

You need to hit on your first rounders and so far Mingo looks like a hit. Other than that, I'm not sure what anyone expects right now.

Hikohadon wrote:Either 1) this shitstorm is on purpose and part of a master plan to make this team instantly better next year

This probably sounds like quibbling, but I still don't think that's it.

The goal is to be a contender, and the reality is that nothing we did this year--probably not even trading away our next decade's worth of 1st round picks for vet talent--nothing was going to make us a contender in 2013.

I think there's a really good argument to be made that some reasonable steps should have been taken to, at minimum, strive for a culture change in Year 1 and then go from there; but also a perfectly fine argument to be made that slowly building a core of good young talented players mostly through the draft and supplementing that talent when you can with good young FAs before eventually investing in more short-term solutions once your window has been opened is the right way to go.

Stuff like "tanking" and being "instantly better next year" doesn't fit into either strategy, I don't think, because you're locked into results while they're focused on process. In Year 1, they tried to add some good young FAs to the roster and they tried to add a good young player with their Top 10 pick. Getting a 1st for Richardson was almost certainly a bonus. In Year 2, I'm sure they hope to draft a good young QB and get him some good young supporting cast members and spend that season developing their new QB. Maybe that translates to wins, maybe it doesn't. What's the hurry. In Year 3, hopefully they've already added two drafts & FA seasons worth of good core talent and they stick to The Plan, but most likely they panic under pressure and do some really stupid shit and get fired. We'll see!

But HooDoo, Banner needs to win next year because the never-ending fan support is suddenly going to fall off, Haslem didn't realize Banner was planning on a 3-5 year rebuild, the sin tax expires (Haslem clearly didn't plan for this) and if they don't show a two year profit Haslem will be pissed about his investment...!

e0y2e3 wrote:But HooDoo, Banner needs to win next year because the never-ending fan support is suddenly going to fall off, Haslem didn't realize Banner was planning on a 3-5 year rebuild, the sin tax expires (Haslem clearly didn't plan for this) and if they don't show a two year profit Haslem will be pissed about his investment...!

e0y2e3 wrote:But HooDoo, Banner needs to win next year because the never-ending fan support is suddenly going to fall off, Haslem didn't realize Banner was planning on a 3-5 year rebuild, the sin tax expires (Haslem clearly didn't plan for this) and if they don't show a two year profit Haslem will be pissed about his investment...!

Holy shit he's got it!

There's a very large element of the fan base that are tired of the rebuilding. I get it, it sucks. But that's why this team has to show a LOT of improvement next year, or Haslem's money train from the taxpayers will disappear without a shadow of a doubt.

The first part of the plan is executed, now they just need to draft properly. So far, I've yet to see a regime in Cleveland do that.

HoodooMan wrote:This probably sounds like quibbling, but I still don't think that's it.

The goal is to be a contender, and the reality is that nothing we did this year--probably not even trading away our next decade's worth of 1st round picks for vet talent--nothing was going to make us a contender in 2013.

I think there's a really good argument to be made that some reasonable steps should have been taken to, at minimum, strive for a culture change in Year 1 and then go from there; but also a perfectly fine argument to be made that slowly building a core of good young talented players mostly through the draft and supplementing that talent when you can with good young FAs before eventually investing in more short-term solutions once your window has been opened is the right way to go.

Once they deigned Alex Smith as not good enough, then the season was riding on Weeden's shoulders and I'm fairly certain they didn't have any illusions there. I think moves were made to change the culture - Chud, Norv, Horton, the defensive FAs - but if the goal is eventually playing in February then this year was a write-off. It had to be. Walrus and GM Zach Reed left them with Gordon and Cameron as the only skill players worth keeping. You weren't fixing that and all the other holes in one off-season, not with the QB situation also staring you in the face.

That said, you get your RG III, Alfred Morris, and Pierre Garcon next year and mmmmmmmmmmmaybe January football isn't out of the question. At least that's what you want the fans to believe.

"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT

Hikohadon wrote:Either 1) this shitstorm is on purpose and part of a master plan to make this team instantly better next year

This probably sounds like quibbling, but I still don't think that's it.

The goal is to be a contender, and the reality is that nothing we did this year--probably not even trading away our next decade's worth of 1st round picks for vet talent--nothing was going to make us a contender in 2013.

I think there's a really good argument to be made that some reasonable steps should have been taken to, at minimum, strive for a culture change in Year 1 and then go from there; but also a perfectly fine argument to be made that slowly building a core of good young talented players mostly through the draft and supplementing that talent when you can with good young FAs before eventually investing in more short-term solutions once your window has been opened is the right way to go.

Stuff like "tanking" and being "instantly better next year" doesn't fit into either strategy, I don't think, because you're locked into results while they're focused on process. In Year 1, they tried to add some good young FAs to the roster and they tried to add a good young player with their Top 10 pick. Getting a 1st for Richardson was almost certainly a bonus. In Year 2, I'm sure they hope to draft a good young QB and get him some good young supporting cast members and spend that season developing their new QB. Maybe that translates to wins, maybe it doesn't. What's the hurry. In Year 3, hopefully they've already added two drafts & FA seasons worth of good core talent and they stick to The Plan, but most likely they panic under pressure and do some really stupid shit and get fired. We'll see!

Banner unfortunately has to pay for the sins of his predecessors in the concept that most fans won't give him a 5 Year Building Plan, not after all the other ones failed.

I think a lot of people also have resigned themselves to the thinking that they'll just blow the picks they accumulate anyway. A Richardson in the hand is worth a Bridgewater in the bush.

If Banner is a smart man, he'll realize he doesn't have the luxury of a slow build. Which is why I feel he's "not trying to not lose", so he can take the lumps they'd prob take anyway this year (just less wins than most anticipated) and improve all the quicker next year so that it doesn't take 4 or 5 years to build into a playoff contender.

At least that's what I HOPE he's doing... the alternative is terrifying.

Hikohadon wrote:Either 1) this shitstorm is on purpose and part of a master plan to make this team instantly better next year

This probably sounds like quibbling, but I still don't think that's it.

The goal is to be a contender, and the reality is that nothing we did this year--probably not even trading away our next decade's worth of 1st round picks for vet talent--nothing was going to make us a contender in 2013.

I think there's a really good argument to be made that some reasonable steps should have been taken to, at minimum, strive for a culture change in Year 1 and then go from there; but also a perfectly fine argument to be made that slowly building a core of good young talented players mostly through the draft and supplementing that talent when you can with good young FAs before eventually investing in more short-term solutions once your window has been opened is the right way to go.

Stuff like "tanking" and being "instantly better next year" doesn't fit into either strategy, I don't think, because you're locked into results while they're focused on process. In Year 1, they tried to add some good young FAs to the roster and they tried to add a good young player with their Top 10 pick. Getting a 1st for Richardson was almost certainly a bonus. In Year 2, I'm sure they hope to draft a good young QB and get him some good young supporting cast members and spend that season developing their new QB. Maybe that translates to wins, maybe it doesn't. What's the hurry. In Year 3, hopefully they've already added two drafts & FA seasons worth of good core talent and they stick to The Plan, but most likely they panic under pressure and do some really stupid shit and get fired. We'll see!

Banner unfortunately has to pay for the sins of his predecessors in the concept that most fans won't give him a 5 Year Building Plan, not after all the other ones failed.

I think a lot of people also have resigned themselves to the thinking that they'll just blow the picks they accumulate anyway. A Richardson in the hand is worth a Bridgewater in the bush.

If Banner is a smart man, he'll realize he doesn't have the luxury of a slow build. Which is why I feel he's "not trying to not lose", so he can take the lumps they'd prob take anyway this year (just less wins than most anticipated) and improve all the quicker next year so that it doesn't take 4 or 5 years to build into a playoff contender.

At least that's what I HOPE he's doing... the alternative is terrifying.

don't you have to give these guys and coaches at least 5 years just to stop the cycle? Not that the Bengals are to be emulated but in the end I think they should be. They have absolutely stuck with Marvin Lewis for a long time. No, the guy isn't Einstein on the sidelines but he has given the team stability at least. They have become a relevant NFL franchise simply by sticking with a coach for awhile. It actually helps. You have to vaporize the every two years overhaul everything strategy. No matter how stupid or moronic Chud may look at times to fans. Keep him here for a minimum of 5 years. It is beyond sad, that my goal now for the Browns is to simply now emulate a disaster organization like the Bengals but compared to Cleveland they look like a model franchise. That is how morbidly pathetic it is here. I think a big reason all the others failed is because 2 years is an impossible time frame to turn it around.

Hikohadon wrote:Either 1) this shitstorm is on purpose and part of a master plan to make this team instantly better next year

This probably sounds like quibbling, but I still don't think that's it.

The goal is to be a contender, and the reality is that nothing we did this year--probably not even trading away our next decade's worth of 1st round picks for vet talent--nothing was going to make us a contender in 2013.

I think there's a really good argument to be made that some reasonable steps should have been taken to, at minimum, strive for a culture change in Year 1 and then go from there; but also a perfectly fine argument to be made that slowly building a core of good young talented players mostly through the draft and supplementing that talent when you can with good young FAs before eventually investing in more short-term solutions once your window has been opened is the right way to go.

Stuff like "tanking" and being "instantly better next year" doesn't fit into either strategy, I don't think, because you're locked into results while they're focused on process. In Year 1, they tried to add some good young FAs to the roster and they tried to add a good young player with their Top 10 pick. Getting a 1st for Richardson was almost certainly a bonus. In Year 2, I'm sure they hope to draft a good young QB and get him some good young supporting cast members and spend that season developing their new QB. Maybe that translates to wins, maybe it doesn't. What's the hurry. In Year 3, hopefully they've already added two drafts & FA seasons worth of good core talent and they stick to The Plan, but most likely they panic under pressure and do some really stupid shit and get fired. We'll see!

Banner unfortunately has to pay for the sins of his predecessors in the concept that most fans won't give him a 5 Year Building Plan, not after all the other ones failed.

I think a lot of people also have resigned themselves to the thinking that they'll just blow the picks they accumulate anyway. A Richardson in the hand is worth a Bridgewater in the bush.

If Banner is a smart man, he'll realize he doesn't have the luxury of a slow build. Which is why I feel he's "not trying to not lose", so he can take the lumps they'd prob take anyway this year (just less wins than most anticipated) and improve all the quicker next year so that it doesn't take 4 or 5 years to build into a playoff contender.

At least that's what I HOPE he's doing... the alternative is terrifying.

don't you have to give these guys and coaches at least 5 years just to stop the cycle? Not that the Bengals are to be emulated but in the end I think they should be. They have absolutely stuck with Marvin Lewis for a long time. No, the guy isn't Einstein on the sidelines but he has given the team stability at least. They have become a relevant NFL franchise simply by sticking with a coach for awhile. It actually helps. You have to vaporize the every two years overhaul everything strategy. No matter how stupid or moronic Chud may look at times to fans. Keep him here for a minimum of 5 years. It is beyond sad, that my goal now for the Browns is to simply now emulate a disaster organization like the Bengals but compared to Cleveland they look like a model franchise. That is how morbidly pathetic it is here. I think a big reason all the others failed is because 2 years is an impossible time frame to turn it around.

I ain't about me.

It's about the fan base.

They won't give these guys 5 years. Unless they have a blockbuster offseason, the repercussions will be felt as soon as next year.

And it's not always as simple as build a winner and they'll come back. Ask the Indians. When people find that they can live quite happily without their sporting teams, it's hard to get them to buy back in for anything short of a championship.

It's not really fair to this front office, but fair's got nothing to do with it.

They won't give these guys 5 years. Unless they have a blockbuster offseason, the repercussions will be felt as soon as next year.

And it's not always as simple as build a winner and they'll come back. Ask the Indians. When people find that they can live quite happily without their sporting teams, it's hard to get them to buy back in for anything short of a championship.

It's not really fair to this front office, but fair's got nothing to do with it.[/quote]

I don't think you can call what the Indians have done as rebuilding a winner. They had 8 consecutive really good years from 1994-2001 and part of what happened there was luck as their best years were the years the Browns weren't here and the new stadium...a series of fortunate and unfortunate events led to the total fan craze about that team. The combo of both being really good and the Browns ain't here. In the 12 years since that team ended, you've had two really good teams....2005 and 2007. The other 9 years before this year not good at all. Basically 3 playoff contending teams in 12 years...not good, but of course better than the Browns!

peeker643 wrote:I like HooDoo's theory better. That sounds more planful and like something an organization that had its shit together would do.

So I'm hopeful.

But Hiko ain't wrong.

Let's call it 'sacrificing' the year for the long term health of the franchise and be done with it. Because they're surely sacrificing the year (either overtly or semi-covertly) and we'll know about any long term benefits starting in May '14.

So glad I agreed to give the guy who bought my season tickets on the condition he get playoff rights this season that concession.

SD:

Do you think Hoyer got the memo , to forget about his hometown shot to try and come in for Weeds , much as when Bernie came in for Danielson .

Hikohadon wrote:This alone isn't tanking. This is just the trumpet to announce "Hey, we've been tanking!"

They started tanking when Free Agency began where they refused to address a boatload of weaknesses with even temporary solutions despite having a surplus of cap space. The continued the tanking by trading out of several draft picks to stockpile draft picks next year - not like those were super-important draft picks, but they needed to get more warm bodies to fill those holes they left by not doing anything about them in FA. Then they broke Training Camp with half the team being Undrafted Free Agents and did nothing to address the fact that they were going into a season with Oneil Cousins in a STARTING role.

Not to mention the release of Phil Dawson, the ONE guy the team could count on to put points on the board, especially in close games that could mean the difference between drafting #1 or #6.

SD:

So far Cundiff has been nails , at nowhere near 3 and a half million per .

Phils deal would have required we pay him on average the top 5 salaries in the league after being franchised so many times if we franchised him again.

FG kickers aren't worth 12 million per if they could kick to the moon.

For as much as I bitch about QBs being too important in the new NFL, even I'm convinced you all have lost your shit.

They aren't tanking here for LeBron, christ. And with the new infusion of QB blood on good teams into the league making the playoffs just because you have a QB is far from guaranteed (and spare me that Colts, again, they were the biggest smoke and mirror team ever).

For fucks sake, they just traded a young player that fit their system for a pick in the late 20s. This is rebuilding in every sense of the word, not just plugging holes with pieces of gum. If they wanted to win big in 2014 T-Rich is instantly more valuable than a pick in the early 20s in 2014. Especially if they go and get a WR with that pick because rookie WRs have big impacts about once every five years.

And everyone acts like they "fixed" the D last year when in reality they ignored a vile secondary and simply signed and drafted the guys necessary to put their system in place. Last off-season was far more about being able to play the 3-4 than fixing the entire D, otherwise you would see a D that had, you know, a secondary.

e0y2e3 wrote:For as much as I bitch about QBs being too important in the new NFL, even I'm convinced you all have lost your shit.

They aren't tanking here for LeBron, christ. And with the new infusion of QB blood on good teams into the league making the playoffs just because you have a QB is far from guaranteed (and spare me that Colts, again, they were the biggest smoke and mirror team ever).

For fucks sake, they just traded a young player that fit their system for a pick in the late 20s. This is rebuilding in every sense of the word, not just plugging holes with pieces of gum. If they wanted to win big in 2014 T-Rich is instantly more valuable than a pick in the early 20s in 2014. Especially if they go and get a WR with that pick because rookie WRs have big impacts about once every five years.

And everyone acts like they "fixed" the D last year when in reality they ignored a vile secondary and simply signed and drafted the guys necessary to put their system in place. Last off-season was far more about being able to play the 3-4 than fixing the entire D, otherwise you would see a D that had, you know, a secondary.

SD:

What we did was trdae 3.4 yards of production , and a guy I suspect ( although not confirmed ) was running his mouth behind the scenes as a lockerroom lawyer , for a tougher back who brings us 4.4 yard average and a number one pick in next years draft .

Moreover the new guy albeit 32 years old was born into the Chud system at College , so he can plug and play immediately .

We gained a #1 pick more production more experience and gave up what exactly ????

SoulDawg

Last edited by SoulDawg74 on Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

peeker643 wrote:I like HooDoo's theory better. That sounds more planful and like something an organization that had its shit together would do.

So I'm hopeful.

But Hiko ain't wrong.

Let's call it 'sacrificing' the year for the long term health of the franchise and be done with it. Because they're surely sacrificing the year (either overtly or semi-covertly) and we'll know about any long term benefits starting in May '14.

So glad I agreed to give the guy who bought my season tickets on the condition he get playoff rights this season that concession.

SD:

Do you think Hoyer got the memo , to forget about his hometown shot to try and come in for Weeds , much as when Bernie came in for Danielson .

SoulDawg

No. Hoyer will do whatever Hoyer can do. And maybe they stumble on a miracle and Hoyer has a 10-yr run. I'd be thrilled were that the case.

Same with Chris Owens and Buster and TJ and the rest of the roster. What I'm saying is Hoyer has flopped with a number of orgs and the talent on the roster indicates their best won't be good enough (or average enough) to make a dent against teams with better talent. Which is 90% of the teams in the league. Maybe higher.

So in that case it's win/win. Maybe Hoyer (or another guy mentioned or not mentioned above) becomes a core piece while others do what they were always gonna do and the team doesn't win.

I think that's the state of the roster and to a large extent that was planned by the front office to have it play out that way.

That aside, no way you can say they didn't upgrade with Dez and Krueger and Mingo and Groves. Those guys are fine and provide quality and depth (to one extent or another). But Rome wasn't built in a day and they still need their coliseum which is a QB.

peeker643 wrote:I like HooDoo's theory better. That sounds more planful and like something an organization that had its shit together would do.

So I'm hopeful.

But Hiko ain't wrong.

Let's call it 'sacrificing' the year for the long term health of the franchise and be done with it. Because they're surely sacrificing the year (either overtly or semi-covertly) and we'll know about any long term benefits starting in May '14.

So glad I agreed to give the guy who bought my season tickets on the condition he get playoff rights this season that concession.

SD:

Do you think Hoyer got the memo , to forget about his hometown shot to try and come in for Weeds , much as when Bernie came in for Danielson .

SoulDawg

No. Hoyer will do whatever Hoyer can do. And maybe they stumble on a miracle and Hoyer has a 10-yr run. I'd be thrilled were that the case.

Same with Chris Owens and Buster and TJ and the rest of the roster. What I'm saying is Hoyer has flopped with a number of orgs and the talent on the roster indicates their best won't be good enough (or average enough) to make a dent against teams with better talent.

So in that case it's win/win. Maybe Hoyer (or another guy mentioned or not mentioned above) becomes a core piece while others do what they were always gonna do and the team doesn't win.

I think that's the state of the roster and to a large extent that was planned by the front office to have it play out that way.

That aside, no way you can say they didn't upgrade with Dez and Krueger and Mingo and Groves. Those guys are fine and provide quality and depth (to one extent or another). But Rome wasn't built in a day and they still need their coliseum which is a QB.

SD:

Now your talking , they knew immediately certain guys couldn't make the transistion to a 34 , and they were purged and replacements brought and all transistional bodies , who were thought to be assets were kept , like Skrine Bademosi Gipson Ward DQ Haden and others .

On offense the team just layed down massive outlays in 2012 including four picks for an average running back , and a number one for a QB you could have signed have sihgned with more upside from the UDFA lists.

They were pretty much hog tied as to seeing what they had on offense , especially in regard to QB as there were no appreciable upgrades in free agency or worth their number 6 pick overall , which made Mingo the easy choice to go defense first.

Circa today , the career Jake delhomme campbell backup has been bypassed so they can see what they have in Hoyer , as to what they know about Jason is unsettleing meh at best.

Magahee brings a 4.4 career NFL aveage to Richrdsons carer 3.4 yard average , and a number one pick in next years draft in a QB rich draft to a team who has no clear answer at QB now .

Hoyer goes large ala Rich Gannon after a kick around career, we're in the chips , Hoyer returns to the traveled vet whose seen him kicked around the league , the search for the Grail is back on with the gusto , and no stome shall go unturned . and we have two number ones to go Good will Hunting .

The issue with the Bengals is not Marvin Lewis or Jay Gruden or Mike Zimmer

The issue with Cincy is Mike Brown, the poor man's Jerry Jones, who is also the GM and a first class asshat of the highest order

SD:

Say what you want about Brown , then look at his roster vs ours and get back to me .

SoulDawg

Ok, I will. From 1999-2012 (not really a fair comparison for Cleveland with the first couple of years expansion blues (which never seem to end, so we'll keep 'em in))

Browns winning % .326Bengals winning % .424

Playoffs wins for either team - Zero for each

so in other words - after 14 seasons of unbelievable suck - being the worst team in the NFL (by far) in recent memory, Cincy has averaged only 1 1/2 wins a season more than the Browns.

Whoopty Fucking Do

Their roster is better obviously. So are the rosters of 29 other teams. Not really all that hard. So instead of finishing 3-13 as the Browns will they'll finish 9-7 and back into the division title and lose in the first round of the playoffs.

I don't need to be patient, they're going to be shit forever. - CDT, discussing my favorite NFL team

e0y2e3 wrote:If they wanted to win big in 2014 T-Rich is instantly more valuable than a pick in the early 20s in 2014.

I don't think that's right.

We were in the teeth/butt-clenching "ooooh, hope he can get better!" phase of the bust cycle with Trent, but make no mistake, that's exactly where we were headed. He was running tentative a la William Green in the first half of 2002, he was slow, he was getting very, very little that the defense wasn't giving him, and he often wasn't even getting that.

He looked amazing in his first couple years at Bama, he looked pretty good his Jr year there, he had a couple good games here his rookie season (but only so few because of the ribs and his supporting cast! we hoped), and as a "healthy" 2nd year player, he was basically off-the-street replacement player bad. And when you look like he did and you're producing at a fraction of a fraction of a yard better than Terry Kirby, that's what you are. Whether it's the knees or something else, the guy's taken a nosedive.

Maybe with Luck & Wayne, etc he ascends to 4.0ish YPC competent NFL RB and has a Cedric-Bensony career there, but any non-bust 1st round pick in 2014, wherever the pick falls, is going to give you more than that from day 1.

e0y2e3 wrote:If they wanted to win big in 2014 T-Rich is instantly more valuable than a pick in the early 20s in 2014.

I don't think that's right.

We were in the teeth/butt-clenching "ooooh, hope he can get better!" phase of the bust cycle with Trent, but make no mistake, that's exactly where we were headed. He was running tentative a la William Green in the first half of 2002, he was slow, he was getting very, very little that the defense wasn't giving him, and he often wasn't even getting that.

He looked amazing in his first couple years at Bama, he looked pretty good his Jr year there, he had a couple good games here his rookie season (but only so few because of the ribs and his supporting cast! we hoped), and as a "healthy" 2nd year player, he was basically off-the-street replacement player bad. And when you look like he did and you're producing at a fraction of a fraction of a yard better than Terry Kirby, that's what you are. Whether it's the knees or something else, the guy's taken a nosedive.

Maybe with Luck & Wayne, etc he ascends to 4.0ish YPC competent NFL RB and has a Cedric-Bensony career there, but any non-bust 1st round pick in 2014, wherever the pick falls, is going to give you more than that from day 1.

even though I hate you for completely revising history regarding The LaMonte Conspiracy TM, I think the Ced Benson comparison is spot on.

Dick.

I don't need to be patient, they're going to be shit forever. - CDT, discussing my favorite NFL team

The issue with the Bengals is not Marvin Lewis or Jay Gruden or Mike Zimmer

The issue with Cincy is Mike Brown, the poor man's Jerry Jones, who is also the GM and a first class asshat of the highest order

SD:

Say what you want about Brown , then look at his roster vs ours and get back to me .

SoulDawg

Ok, I will. From 1999-2012 (not really a fair comparison for Cleveland with the first couple of years expansion blues (which never seem to end, so we'll keep 'em in))

Browns winning % .326Bengals winning % .424

Playoffs wins for either team - Zero for each

so in other words - after 14 seasons of unbelievable suck - being the worst team in the NFL (by far) in recent memory, Cincy has averaged only 1 1/2 wins a season more than the Browns.

Whoopty Fucking Do

Their roster is better obviously. So are the rosters of 29 other teams. Not really all that hard. So instead of finishing 3-13 as the Browns will they'll finish 9-7 and back into the division title and lose in the first round of the playoffs.

SD:

Depends on if your buyin or is you selling , because that stat pile you compiled is worthless , when i have a stat that says they've been to 2 straight playoffs and are enroute for a third with a roster whose second team players could replace some of our starters , and a solid if not specatacular player at QB .

All with the cheapest owner in football , who has his head coach doubling as GM , and sharing those duties with himself and his daughter.

HoodooMan wrote:We were in the teeth/butt-clenching "ooooh, hope he can get better!" phase of the bust cycle with Trent, but make no mistake, that's exactly where we were headed. He was running tentative a la William Green in the first half of 2002, he was slow, he was getting very, very little that the defense wasn't giving him, and he often wasn't even getting that.

This FTW.

Tank? Yes.

But not a Herschel comparison at all. We ripped those foo's off for a bust happening in real-time. Like Doo Doo says not a flaming has no value bust, but a never gonna be the player as drafted * in a meh way bust. So if you are trying to win now yah probably keep that. But if you are in rebuild you leverage your assets that aren't future building blocks and get what you can. We got way more than we shoulda.

This was a July baseball-y trade.

* - By this I am not including peeker who told us then and there drafting TRich was a msitake casue he twert that good. Just getting that footnote in to keep it frendly-like.

HoodooMan wrote:We were in the teeth/butt-clenching "ooooh, hope he can get better!" phase of the bust cycle with Trent, but make no mistake, that's exactly where we were headed. He was running tentative a la William Green in the first half of 2002, he was slow, he was getting very, very little that the defense wasn't giving him, and he often wasn't even getting that.

This FTW.

Tank? Yes.

But not a Herschel comparison at all. We ripped those foo's off for a bust happening in real-time. Like Doo Doo says not a flaming has no value bust, but a never gonna be the player as drafted * in a meh way bust. So if you are trying to win now yah probably keep that. But if you are in rebuild you leverage your assets that aren't future building blocks and get what you can. We got way more than we shoulda.

This was a July baseball-y trade.

* - By this I am not including peeker who told us then and there drafting TRich was a msitake casue he twert that good. Just getting that footnote in to keep it frendly-like.

For those who believe in coincidence , I'm sure they'll just pass it off .

I have no such belief and the timing triggered the hairs which stand up on the back of my neck , that they're was more than a little pleasure on the part of the front office in handling this bit of business.

Message to the lockeroom , more production per down for less cash , and a pot of gold to collect in 2014 for a simple cough cough business move .